Week #4: Doctrine of Eternal Marriage

 

It is true that covenant marriages should have companions that give 100 percent.  In a world where marriage is considered contractual, a contract one can cancel at any time and for any reason, there is waning hope for the sanctity and success of marriage.  Every marriage is tested, and often.  The difference between “covenant” marriages and “contractual” marriages is the view of the magnitude of divorce and the desire to work through ones challenges for the greater good of both parties (and families where children are present).  In a General Conference address for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in October 1996, Bruce C. Hafen of the seventy shared “three wolves” that commonly test marriages.  These wolves are “natural adversity”, our “own imperfections”, and “excessive individualism”. (Hafen, 1996) 

We will all experience adversity naturally in marriage, whether through ill health, loss of a child or loved one, loss of a job, or the like.  What we do in the face of such adversity will be the deciding factor in our success as married couples.  Do we turn toward each other or away?  Do we share our feelings, however painful and difficult that may be?  Do we point fingers, blame, and shame or do we accept our portion of responsibility and lift our spouse as they bear their portion?  All of these factors play a part in the success of a marriage in dealing with natural adversity.  Natural adversity is something we cannot avoid yet negative outcomes due to these challenges within our marital relationship are avoidable. 

Our imperfections are opportunities for refinement of self and the marriage relationship.  As we strive to overcome our weaknesses and to lean on our spouses for support of our desire to better ourselves we not only grow individually but collectively.  As we strive to lift our spouse by praising their accomplishments and triumphs over imperfections we improve our relationship and ourselves.  My husband has a hard time expressing his emotions, especially when he is stressed.  Growing up an only child and being left alone often due to the absence of his working single mom, he had to deal with many challenges alone.  He learned to rely on himself.  He has worked really hard to learn to share his feelings with me, to allow me to listen and to sympathize with work troubles or general worries.  I feel more connected to him when he opens up to me.  Being that he has an innate desire to “fix” his own problems and not have to rely on anyone he has to fight the urge to keep things to himself, and to resist asking for help.  Each time he opens up to me he feels a sense of relief and his conviction to allow me to shoulder the burden or just to allow him to vent, is renewed. 

 

Excessive individualism seems to be becoming the new norm in society.  “Ours is an age of the waning of belonging.” (Hafen, 1996)  The desire for autonomy is a commendable one if not taken to excess.  The Lord desires us to be self-sufficient but not to “go it alone” in life either.  Satan would have us seek his exploited “refuge” of “alone time” and for us to pull away from loved ones, especially in times of crisis.  He attempts to make us believe that we need “space” and that we can count on no one but ourselves.  He is not called the “father of lies” for no reason. 

Our desire to overcome adversity, imperfection, and excessive individualism will draw us to each other as married partners.  As we lean on one another, lift and encourage one another, and rely on and trust one another a covenant marriage will grow and prosper.  As for contractual marriage there is the potential for similar success if each party is willing to sacrifice and work for the good of the other.  Sadly, it seems that among these marriages the convenience of ending the contract is often too enticing and an easier road than working and sacrificing.  The Lord has instructed us to enter covenant marriages so that we might attain our highest glory with Him.  Although some marriages of a contractual nature succeed and prosper in today’s society the promised blessings of a covenant marriage are only made to those that enter the everlasting covenant of marriage.  As the Lord says in Doctrine and Covenants sections 132,

Therefore, if a man marry him a wife in the world, and he marry her not by me nor by my word, and he covenant with her so long as he is in the world and she with him, their covenant and marriage are not of force when they are dead, and when they are out of the world; therefore, they are not bound by any law when they are out of the world. (v. 15)

And again, verily I say unto you, if a man marry a wife, and make a covenant with her for time and for all eternity, if that covenant is not by me or by my word, which is my law, and is not sealed by the Holy Spirit of promise, through him whom I have anointed and appointed unto this power, then it is not valid neither of force when they are out of the world, because they are not joined by me, saith the Lord, neither by my word; …they cannot, therefore, inherit my glory… (v. 18)

And again, verily I say unto you, if a man marry a wife by my word, which is my law, and by the new and everlasting covenant, and it is sealed unto them by the Holy Spirit of promise, by him who is anointed, unto whom I have appointed this power and the keys of this priesthood; and it shall be said unto them—Ye shall come forth in the first resurrection; and if it be after the first resurrection, in the next resurrection; and shall inherit thrones, kingdoms, principalities, and powers, dominions, all heights and depths—…in time, and through all eternity; and shall be of full force when they are out of the world;… (v.19)

If we truly love our spouse, if we desire selflessness and charity, if we desire our love to grow and thrive throughout time and all eternity, then we need to keep a focus and goal of eternal, covenant marriages.

References:

Hafen, B.C. (1996, November).  Covenant Marriage. Ensign. 26 

Week 3: Threats to Marriage

“When it really counts Constitutional law is as much about culture as it is about the Constitution.” (Dushku, 2015)  Does our culture drive ones perceptions of the Constitution and its applicability to the trends of the current time?  If “Constitutional law drives culture” (Dushku, 2015) then could the same be said in reverse? 

As I understand, the Constitution was created to ascertain the promise of certain rights for the American people and to establish governmental laws fundamental to our society as a nation.  Little is different as it pertains to basic human rights almost 230 years after the Constitution’s creation and signing.  Yet, we encounter often those that question its applicability to our day and the current trends of the nation as they pertain to such matters as the right to bear arms and the right to marriage acknowledgement among same sex marriage unions. 

In the Supreme Court’s ruling in 2015 to reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeals as it pertained to the lawfulness of same sex marriages, Supreme Court justices ruled that the Constitution granted the petitioners their right to “equal dignity in the eyes of the law” (Obergfell v. Hodges, 2015)  Their acknowledgment of marriage’s many advantages as well as it being the primary bond of society shows the courts opinion of the marriage union.  The justices all appear to have a high regard for marriage and its role in the unification and support of our nation.  Yet, their ruling says nothing as to the nature of these unions as it pertains to our creation and the purpose of our gender.

I see how the desire for equality is driving force behind the petitioner’s request of the Supreme Court.  I see how acknowledgement of their love and devotion to one another is meaningful and of great importance to them.  I see that they too have a high regard for marriage and therefore desire to be equal partakers of the advantages that acknowledged marriages in America are afforded. 

I do, however, also feel that equality of rights should not equate to support of same sex marriage as the new acknowledged norm.  Equality does not necessarily equate to support and acceptance.  I feel that those that desire to be a part of a same sex union should be shown love and respect as any other human being deserves.  I also feel though that while they are deserving of equal rights and respect that I am deserving of my right to disagree as to their view that same sex marriage is an acceptable alternative to a union between man and woman.  I feel that God created His children to fill the purpose of their creation, to learn to live happily and to provide bodies for His Spirit children who have yet to come to the earth. 

I agree with the sentiments of church leaders that, upon the ruling to legalize same sex marriage in Utah, said “As we face this and other issues of our time, we encourage all to bear in mind our Heavenly Father’s purposes in creating the earth and providing for our mortal birth and experience here as His children. “God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth” (Genesis 1:27–28). “Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh” (Genesis 2:24). Marriage between a man and a woman was instituted by God and is central to His plan for His children and for the well-being of society. Strong families, guided by a loving mother and father, serve as the fundamental institution for nurturing children, instilling faith, and transmitting to future generations the moral strengths and values that are important to civilization and crucial to eternal salvation.

Changes in the civil law do not, indeed cannot, change the moral law that God has established. God expects us to uphold and keep His commandments regardless of divergent opinions or trends in society.” (Official Statement, 2014)  I believe that the changes made to the civil law in no way change the law of God.  I love and respect those that wish to experience equality but that doesn’t mean that I am required to accept their views as my own.

 

References:

Dushku, A. (Writer). (2015, July 7). Religious Freedom Annual Review (Conference) [Video file]. Retrieved January 13, 2017, from http://www.iclrs.org/content/events/111/2130.mp4

The religious freedom implications of the Supreme Court’s decision on same-sex marriage in Obergefell V. Hodges.

Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U.S. (June 26, 2015).

Official Statement. (2014, January 10).  LDS Church Instructs Leaders Regarding Same-Sex Marriage.  Retrieved January 17, 2016, from https://www.lds.org/church/news/lds-church-instructs-leaders-regarding-same-sex-marriage?lang=eng. 

Week #2: Marriage Trends & Divorce

When I was assigned to read a publication called the "State of Our Unions" for a marriage class I’m taking I had no idea what I was in for.  I discovered a profoundly organized and impactful publication!  I began to wonder to what primary audience this publication was written.  Did government agencies, counseling organizations, churches and the like receive this publication for distribution?  I realized this material is so important but likely not being shared as it could and should be.  Touching on topics such as marriage, divorce, unmarried cohabitation, and the loss of a child-centeredness, this publication opened my eyes to some very real truths about the state of marriage in our country.  

I imagine most Americans don’t realize that cohabitation, or the trial run of marriage, is in fact not as advantageous as one would think.  Studies show that couples that live together prior to marriage “have higher rates of divorce and lower levels of marital quality…report more negative communication…” and experience increased likelihood of aggression and infidelity. (VanDenBerghe & Hawkins, 2012, p.75)  While cohabitating couples that have a child together are “twice as likely as married couple to break up before the child turns twelve” (Marquardt, et al., 2012).  One would think that this knowledge could potentially impact ones decision to enter a cohabitating relationship.  If that isn’t reason enough to reconsider the decision to cohabitate then the realization that federal studies show that “children in cohabitating households are markedly more likely to be physically, sexually, and emotionally abused than children in both intact, married families and single-parent families.”(Marquardt, et al., 2012), then I don’t know what is. 

In some ways I can see ones logic in giving marriage a “trial run” by living together before marriage.  However, I ask, where is the commitment to each other in simply paying bills together, sharing household tasks, and potentially raising a child when at any time one can walk away with potentially no legal obligation to the other?  I think about what it would have been like if my husband and I had lived together before marrying.  Having grown up in a family where living together before marriage was not practiced I know that I would have felt uncomfortable with cohabitation.  Honestly I would have felt like I was playing an adult version of “house”.  I would have wondered if at any time, if he didn’t care for my actions, the way I did or didn’t do something, if he would decide I wasn’t worth it and just leave.  What if he never realized the need for give and take in a relationship, the need for personal sacrifice for another, and decided after a time that he didn’t enjoy doing his “share” of the housework?  Would he leave?  Would I want him to leave?  I can’t think of anything about my husband, his mannerisms or behaviors, that would constitute my wanting to leave him so I don’t imagine cohabiting would have been a deal breaker in the sense that I would decide I couldn’t tolerate him.  Yet, our sharing bills and keys wouldn’t have made me want to stick it out even more if troubles did arise.  Being married, legally obligated to one another, causes one to pause when troubles arise and think about the longevity and devotion of the relationship (if even for a small moment).  This pause gives way to the realization that I signed up for this when I married him and I promised to do my best to work through whatever came our way.  Where does this kind of commitment come from with cohabitation?

When it comes to children, how adequately do child support laws protect single, unmarried mothers who are abandoned by their child’s/children’s father?  Is it more difficult for a single mother to prove paternity and therefore collect financial support from her child’s/children’s father?  Things one would not have to worry about if they were legally married.  This says nothing as to the emotional expense separation and abandonment causes for a child.  Those ramifications cannot be fixed with any amount money. 

With research inconsistent to prove that cohabitation is beneficial to marriage preparation (Marquardt, et al., 2012, p. 78) there needs to be further study of both perceived advantages and apparent disadvantages.  In the grand scheme of relationships, and their impact on communities, marriage fosters cooperative unions that not only allow and enable children to thrive but also aids to secure communities as it helps members of families to become successful as well as resilient in times of struggle. (Marquardt, et al., 2012, p. 6)  “Both the soft stories and the hard evidence attest to the fact that good marriages are undeniably worth the work, sacrifice, and dedication they require.” (VanDenBerghe & Hawkins, 2012, p.77)

References:

Marquardt, E., Blankenhorn, D., Lerman, R., Malone-Colón, L., and Wilcox, W.B. “The President’s Marriage Agenda for the Forgotten Sixty Percent,” The State of Our Unions (Charlottesville, VA: National Marriage Project and Institute for American Values, 2012).

VanDenBerghe, E., & Hawkins, A. J. (2012). The Warm, Happy Marriage: Cold, Hard Facts to Consider. Successful Marriages and Families: Proclamation Principles and Research Perspectives, 75, 77.